The Guardian newspaper, a British
newspaper (you can see why it might happen there), reports on the Los Angeles
mansion bought by a co-founder of the Uber car ride service. Here’s what he
paid: $72.5 million dollars for the house and the land. Why
is this interesting? Well, around the world for the last a year or more
Uber drivers have been demonstrating, striking, complaining that they’re taking
home ridiculously small amounts of money; $5, $10, $15 an hour and they’re lucky to get at the upper end of that range. We also just read this last
couple of weeks that the police in Los Angeles are again rousting up the
homeless from the little tent cities that they have established under the
freeways. Yeah, that’s America these days: screw the worker, screw the homeless, Why is that relevant? Because not paying Uber drivers so that they can’t afford a
home and have to live in a tent, or they can’t afford a decent living even if
they have home, that’s what’s necessary so that the Uber founder, the head of the
company, can live in a $72.5 million mansion. Here’s the
economics to understand: if you paid those Uber workers a living wage (what’s necessary to have a home and a car and to live a decent life) and if you
provided housing for the homeless, you have the money.
It’s all there it would just mean (and let’s cry for a moment) that the founder
the co-founder of Uber would have to settle, I don’t know, for a million dollar
house or maybe even a two million dollar house if we want to
reward him. But he couldn’t have a $72 million dollar house. That’s the cost to him.
And what’s the benefit? Doing something for tens of thousands of Uber
drivers and their families and more thousands of the homeless. You tell me
what your ethics, you r religion and your morality suggest is the way to go here.